By Senator Bill Rompkey and Senator Dennis Patterson
Canadians want to protect their iconic
lighthouses. These landmarks bring alive our
past, aid our boats and aircraft in the present,
and could enhance our community life and
regional revenues in the future.
But how to preserve them?
About 50 lighthouses still employ on-site lightkeepers, and the Canadian Coast Guard has no present plans to do away with them.
But hundreds of other lighthouses stand unoccupied on coastal headlands and islands. They use automated, often solar-powered lights. The traditional towers remain, often with a keeper’s house and boatshed. But all these could vanish.
Last year, the Coast Guard declared the great majority of their un-staffed lighthouses “surplus” to their needs. In place of the dramatically visible towers, they would use a navigational beacon on a bare-bones structure – a “light on a stick.”
The Coast Guard says that new fixtures can meet safety standards at a much lower cost. But many Canadians, whether for community tradition or tourism revenue or other reasons, say the old structures should stay.
How to preserve them? The Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act, sponsored by Senators and passed by Parliament, provides a mechanism.
Since the HLPA came into effect last year, any 25 Canadians can nominate any lighthouse for protection. Parks Canada, under the Minister of Environment, then carries out an evaluation. If certain conditions are met, the government will designate the lighthouse a heritage lighthouse and turn it over to a municipality or non-profit group or even a private business. The new owners and their successors must preserve the lighthouse structure and appearance.
Even before the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act came into being, scattered groups and businesses across Canada took over some lighthouses. But as they can testify, it requires hard work and often a scramble for money.
The HLPA, since it was a private members’ bill, provides no funding. Neither does it oblige the Coast Guard to bring the lighthouses up to a good standard of repair before handing them off.
And the original sponsors of the law never expected that under its auspices, the Canadian Coast Guard would in a single day declare nearly a thousand lighthouses – half of them “inactive” but the rest in daily and nightly use – to be “surplus.” Critics say this grand dump of lighthouse structures could bog down the HLPA to the point of unworkability.
The deadline for nominating any lighthouse (whether surplus or non-surplus) for heritage status expires in May, 2012. So far Parks Canada has received only around 40 nominations, mostly in Ontario.
That’s just a fraction of the thousand “surplus” lights. Of the rest, some may be too remote or too unimportant in local tradition to arouse interest. And since the official term “lighthouse” covers various kinds of structure, some may simply lack visual appeal.
But many lighthouses do fit the striking “postcard” image of lofty sentinels along our shores. (Parks Canada quotes the figure of 241 “major lightstations” under the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, which handles real property for the Coast Guard.) And from what the Senate committee studying the matter has heard, there’s a strong sentiment for preservation.
Then why, to date, have so few community or regional groups come forward to nominate heritage lighthouses? We suspect two major factors.
One possibility is that the word may not have spread sufficiently. Many people have a vague impression that there’s some question hanging over lighthouses. Not so many realize that the vast majority are already declared “surplus” and slated for disposal.
Nor do most people know that any group of at least 25 citizens can nominate a lighthouse for heritage status. A few Internet clicks will bring up instructions from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and from Parks Canada, the lead agency for the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act.
Another possibility is that some who did get the word and looked at the matter may have been scared off.
The Coast Guard under budget pressures has let many lighthouses deteriorate. Nominating a lighthouse for heritage status costs nothing, but before it gets the designation that protects its future structure and character, the group ultimately taking it over must accept responsibility for maintaining it to a certain standard. Repairing rundown structures can be costly.
For our Senate committee studying heritage lighthouses, the air is filled with questions. For example: is there time enough under the HLPA deadline? Is there enough interest and potential commitment among regions and communities? Is some organizational framework needed?
Below all that, where will any necessary monies come from? Can community groups cope by themselves? For these and other questions, we have found no sweeping solutions to date.
As Senators grapple with these issues, we invite fellow Canadians to give some thought as to whether and how this country should preserve its iconic lighthouses.
Senator Bill Rompkey, Labrador, serves as Chair and Senator Dennis Patterson, Nunavut, as Vice-Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.
This letter appeared in several newspapers across Atlantic Canada.
